English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background Artificial intelligence can assist in interpreting chest X-ray radiography (CXR) data, but large datasets require efficient image annotation. The purpose of this study is to extract CXR labels from diagnostic reports based on natural language processing, train convolutional neural networks (CNNs), and evaluate the classification performance of CNN using CXR data from multiple centers Methods We collected the CXR images and corresponding radiology reports of 74,082 subjects as the training dataset. The linguistic entities and relationships from unstructured radiology reports were extracted by the bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) model, and a knowledge graph was constructed to represent the association between image labels of abnormal signs and the report text of CXR. Then, a 25-label classification system were built to train and test the CNN models with weakly supervised labeling. Results In three external test cohorts of 5,996 symptomatic patients, 2,130 screening examinees, and 1,804 community clinic patients, the mean AUC of identifying 25 abnormal signs by CNN reaches 0.866 ± 0.110, 0.891 ± 0.147, and 0.796 ± 0.157, respectively. In symptomatic patients, CNN shows no significant difference with local radiologists in identifying 21 signs (p &gt; 0.05), but is poorer for 4 signs (p   0.05), but is poorer at classifying nodules (p = 0.013). In community clinic patients, CNN shows no significant difference for 12 signs (p &gt; 0.05), but performs better for 6 signs (p &lt; 0.001). Conclusion We construct and validate an effective CXR interpretation system based on natural language processing.

Development and multicenter validation of chest X-ray radiography interpretations based on natural language processing